A healthy lifestyle has been always a desire for many people in modern society, in which various factors harm their well-being. On the one hand, some people argue that a healthy lifestyle can be achieved easily in the countryside. However, others feel that cities will be the best places for people’s health. The merits of both arguments will be analyzed before a conclusion is decided upon.
Firstly, there are benefits of living far from cities. For example, the vast majority of food resources there are self-sufficient since many of them make a living by farming and own much more land to do growing. As a result, vegetables are less likely to be exposed to any chemical fertilizers, which have detrimental effects on human health. Although this seems to reduce the risk of suffering from long-term diseases like cancer, it does little to provide them with the best treatment that I will mention later. Thus, the merits of this opinion are hard to support.
However, many people agree that living in cities will be beneficial to their health. For example, a large number of hospitals equipped with cutting-edge technology gathered densely in urban areas, bringing significant opportunities to overcome illness. Moreover, almost all doctors opt to live and work in the cities, where they find it easier for them to improve their professional skills. In addition to this, when it comes to the likelihood of consuming contaminated food, households nowadays are more conscious of this problem. They are able to make their own vegetable-planting gardens regardless of how large their spaces are and recycle food as a source of fertilizer. Thus, the heightened benefits of this opinion regarding living in cities can clearly be seen.
After looking at these two opposing points of view, it is felt that it is better in terms of health to live in urban areas as opposed to living in the countryside. Thus, it is hoped that a lifestyle in the cities will gradually be improved to suit the need of residents.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 98, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...eneficial to their health. For example, a large number of hospitals equipped with cutting-edge te...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, however, if, look, moreover, regarding, so, thus, well, for example, in addition, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 13.1623246493 152% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 10.4138276553 29% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 24.0651302605 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 56.0 41.998997996 133% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 8.3376753507 36% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1675.0 1615.20841683 104% => OK
No of words: 336.0 315.596192385 106% => OK
Chars per words: 4.98511904762 5.12529762239 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.28139028586 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79162065908 2.80592935109 99% => OK
Unique words: 190.0 176.041082164 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.565476190476 0.561755894193 101% => OK
syllable_count: 526.5 506.74238477 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 6.0 2.52805611222 237% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.2309727071 49.4020404114 75% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.5294117647 106.682146367 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.7647058824 20.7667163134 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.41176470588 7.06120827912 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.67935871743 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.113593112795 0.244688304435 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0374304065462 0.084324248473 44% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0292313717631 0.0667982634062 44% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0656144245127 0.151304729494 43% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0333821707784 0.056905535591 59% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.0 13.0946893788 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 50.2224549098 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.3001002004 95% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.66 12.4159519038 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.0 8.58950901804 105% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 78.4519038076 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 9.78957915832 82% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.